------------- Santosh Helekar wrote: I am indeed an expert on plagiarism because as a scientific laborer I have a professional need to know and teach students, fellows and researchers who work with me what is it that constitutes plagiarism. This is because they and I have to write full length peer-reviewed original research articles and grants, as well as review the ones written by others.
------------ GL responds: The above is similar to your line on the "cancer cure" discussion; where you claimed: "critical reading, understanding and study of the latest original papers." Such claims do not fool those who know. To some, that sounds pretty impressive. One cannot fool ALL people for ALL the time. My jaw dropped to see your posts on "cancer cure". Is that your MO? Use of anti-plagiarism software is like the 'radar gun / trapster' on the car to detect the speed traps; instead of obeying the speed limits. It appears as you have studied the topic of plagiarism, you have developed a way to circumvent (find a loophole); while continuing to plagiarize. The following however may help those who truly desire to write their thoughts and perspectives. Referring to References: This is not pointed at any individual. Hopefully it will address misconceptions and change some practices on Goanet From the article in the link below from Indiana University, there is both an acceptable AND unacceptable summation of what is written / published. The former is called "Acceptable Paraphrasing" (kosher / permissible). The later is called "Plagiarism" (non-kosher / not-OK). The terms "Paraphrasing" and "Plagiarism" is taken from the Indiana University education site. Readers may want to review the examples provided for themselves. http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/plagiarism.shtml If I am not mistaken, the plagiarized material was from the above link. But conveniently excluded were the two types of summations - the acceptable and unacceptable. Is this a similar to the selective but inappropriate quotes on "cancer cure"? Semantics aside, what is not acceptable (except for one solitary member on goanet) is WHOLESALE use of "Copy and Paste" even with a reference / link. Here, the author has not added anything original to the dialog / discussion other than FALSELY presenting himself as an expert on the topic d' jour (topic of the day), displaying his / her prowess at web-surfing and technology-skills; including use of software to detect plagiarism. At best, the author uses COPY AND PASTE technology rather than self-knowledge and persuasive writing skills to enlighten and expand the dialog. More likely, he / she deflects discussing the specific issue. In the dialog, he / she may tend to mis-state the issue (to suit the COPY and PASTE material), and then summarizes with bogus comments and innuendos. Does plagiarism software differentiate between the two types of summations presented in the Indiana website? I do not know, since I do not deal with such software. Software certainly helps raise a 'red flag'. Following which as the Indiana website points out, the material has to be closely analyzed by knowledgeable individuals on the subject; before any definitive conclusions are drawn. One individual is not judge, jury, and executioner; as some of the you-know-what do on goanet. The history article from Yale University (see link below) demonstrates how quote(s) from a reference should be used. It should only be a VERY SMALL PART of the author's writing. The author uses his own knowledge (previously researched) as the basis to make the rational and persuasive points. And the reference(s) is only an added back-up. http://gotmedieval.blogspot.com/2010/08/professor-newts-distorted-history.html Santosh please feel free to forward this post to your devoted followers on multiple other lists including the spam lists to which you belong. This information on both history and appropriate way to use references will likely help them. Nice to see, you are pretty selective in what you forward from Goanet to your spam list, even on the same thread; and to note that the two you-know-what are the only one sharing love notes.:=)) Regards, GL